Close Book On Pornography

OUR VIEWS

The Orange County Library System's Decision To Block Access To Internet Pornography Is A Good Move For The Taxpayers It Serves.

March 11, 1997|By Fuchsia

The image is revolting.

A man with his back to the wall, sitting in a small cubicle in a public library frequented by children and families, hooked up to the Internet, pornographic pictures flashing on his screen.

Orange County Library System officials don't want that scenario on public property, at taxpayer expense. That's why they have blocked access to pornography on computers used by library patrons.

Good move.

Why should taxpayers subsidize the sexual proclivities of a small minority? The library doesn't stock pornographic magazines or books. Why should it be obligated to provide access to such material on computers?

Obviously, it shouldn't.

Ah, but the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida says that blocking Internet access to pornography impinges on First Amendment protections of free speech.

Balderdash.

Government shouldn't be in the business of determining what information may be published on the Internet. Certainly, the First Amendment does guarantee the open exchange of information and ideas.

The First Amendment, though, does not preclude public libraries from deciding what information is suitable for their clientele. Public libraries can't offer everything that has been published or produced. Instead, they properly make choices about what to offer patrons based on the community's interests, values and standards.

Orange County Library Director Dorothy Field said she blocked ''sites that by anyone's definition could only be called hard-core pornography'' - the same standard the library long has used in buying books and magazines.

''It would be equal to what you find in the back rooms of adult bookstores,'' she said.

What's more, she said, only access to pornographic pictures has been eliminated from the library system's 70 computers. That would appear to be in keeping with the 1973 Supreme Court ruling that defined pornographic material as lacking ''serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value.''

Scholars doing research on pornography, for example, still would find a wealth of written material available on the Internet at the public library. They just wouldn't be able to view or download graphic depictions.

That seems quite reasonable.

There's another reason Ms. Field, with the support of the library board, restricted Internet access. Simply put, people who were viewing pornography typically would spend hours at the computer, tying up the machines for others. For the same reasons, Ms. Field also has blocked computer users at the libraries from accessing chat rooms and electronic mail.

The library computers aren't personal playthings. They're public resources and should be available for all to enjoy.

The blocking policy also ensures that youngsters won't be using library computers to view pornographic pictures.

Unfortunately, the ACLU of Florida says it will file a lawsuit to force the library to overturn its policy. The group shouldn't waste its money.

There are plenty of places in Orange County where those who want pornography can get their fill. The public library needn't be one of them.